Saturday, May 15, 2010

METROPOLITAN STRATEGY REVIEWComment on discussion paper:Sydney Greater Metropolitan Region12 May 20101. STRATEGY PROGRESS SO FARThe planning strategy adopted for the Metropolitan Region will have many longterm and irreversible consequences. The Government’s aims are listed in figure 2of the Metropolitan Strategy Review 2036 Discussion Paper. By use of the terms“city of cities” and “urban renewal” the document indicates a predeterminedintention to continue with the strategy of higher-densities in existing communities(termed “urban consolidation”). This is despite it being readily apparent that thisstrategy over nearly two decades has failed to achieve the benchmarks stated.Concurrent with these policies having been applied more aggressively thananywhere else in the world and with respect to the aims stated in the discussionpaper it is readily apparent that:• Liveability has declined. Services have deteriorated, congestion hasincreased, and charges have risen.• Economic competitiveness of New South Wales, now the worst performingof Australian states, has plummeted as business and people move to otherstates.• Fairness has declined as housing costs have risen to be among the highestin the developed world. Many, especially the young and the underprivileged,are now fated to never be able to own their own homes.• The environment has not been protected as gardens, green space andheritage within the city are destroyed to make way for unit blocks while theenvironmental footprint per person has continued to rise• Governance has deteriorated as democratic rights of ratepayers aretrampled on by taking away the planning powers of councils. There is nowmuch dissatisfaction with the manner in which individual planning decisionsare made. The public perception is that development is mainly for thebenefit of developers and politicians with whom they have a closerelationship. The latest example is a proposal for compulsory acquisition ofhomes for development purposes.Reasons for the failure of these high-density policies are documented in appendix1.

2. SUGGESTED ALTERNATIVESIt is vital that the Commonwealth Government organise an objective study toascertain the number of people that Australia can sustain. The most suitable bodyfor such a study is the CSIRO. The New South Wales Government should insistthat such a study be undertaken.If the population is to increase development should aim at developing towns acrossthe whole state. This should include:1. Whole of State Development and repopulation of declining regions2. A viable decentralisation policy. A mix of incentives and infrastructure provisioncan be used to deal with the time and distance issues raised by decentralisation.These include high-speed rail, top class telecommunications and personal andcompany tax incentives.3. The creation of satellite cities. Each to be as autonomous as practical andlinked by high-speed transport and communications. The planning for each satellitecity would emphasise:• the creation of green belts• optimal location from an environment perspective – upstream of agriculturaluse• good transport networks - easy walk/bike/public transport to centre and aroad network designed to facilitate public transport routes• optimal environmental design – water reuse in city and downstream, thermalproperties, power cables underground, sustainable plantings4. Judicious expansion of Sydney. This will be better environmentally thanincreasing densities. The infrastructure for these greenfields (or near greenfields)sites should be funded by the State and/or Commonwealth5. Higher densities, where feasible, for those communities where the majoritythrough their local council express this wish which will evolve over time. As landvalues in the community increase more and more ij that community will be inclinedto want to develop or sell to a developer. A community should have the right toveto a development proposal unless this can be shown to be undisputedly againstthe larger public interest.Full advantage should be taken of the availability of Federal infrastructure funds.Method of ImplementationInstead of specifying land where development can take place, the Department ofPlanning should specify where development in the State cannot take place. Itshould be left to the private sector to initiate and develop new areas withGovernment taking a more passive supervisory role. The Department of Planningshould ensure that properly designed user fees, markets and incentives are inplace to optimise market-driven development for the long-term benefit of the widercommunity.The planning and creation of new area developments should be shared betweenthe Department of Planning and local communities. The role of the Department ofPlanning should include:• Specifying where development cannot take place• Establishing general principles• Planning for and establishing major infrastructure• Dealing with matters of genuine state significance• Coordinating those matters that cross borders of local communities thatcannot be dealt with efficiently at local level.

District Local Authorities (DLA)An outline of one possible scheme follows as an example, here for want of a name,termed “District Local Authorities”.Developers would prospectively purchase land in suitable unrestricted areas thatcomply with the principles of the Department of Planning relating to development.The developer would apply to the Department for the creation of a “District LocalAuthority” for the area. A public hearing before an independent determiningauthority such as the Land and Environment Court would be held to determine theapplication. The application would include an environmental impact statement.Hearing submissions should be sought from the Department of Planning, the localShire and interested members of the public. Applicant criteria that would have tobe satisfied would include financial capacity, expertise and historical performance.The determining authority would have to be satisfied that the local community is infavour of the development.The developer would subdivide the land. Requirements to be fulfilled would includesuch matters as:• Complying with a state standard statutory minimum local environment planand standard development control plan• Complying with a minimum requirement for internal and externalinfrastructure• Complying with standards relating to sales promotion• Establishing financial guarantees that could be used to compensate thesubdivided lot purchasers if the development eventually does not go ahead• Provide sales contracts for purchasers that at least include adequatestandard consumer protection clauses and information.In addition to statutory minimums for land development, developments would mostlikely need to feature desirable facilities such public open space otherwise the plotsultimately will not sell.Fixed interest bonds with some State and Commonwealth participation wouldfinance infrastructure. In the event of competing applications vying for such fundsthere should be a tender process with awards being determined by, for example,the minimum requirement for public funds per residential lot produced.The developer would write protective covenants for property owners that• Comply with general principles set out by the Department of Planning• Specify the particular building and living conditions that will apply to theparticular developmentIn conjunction with the Department of Planning the developer would create anowners’ association or a board of directors (which would become the District LocalAuthority) to subsequently enforce and modify the initial covenants. In consultationwith the Department, the District Local Authority would determine and enforce allnecessary charges such as rates to repay its portion of the infrastructure bonds andto provide local facilities and services.In time such Districts may amalgamate into council areas.

Save Our Suburbs has another article in the prestigious international New Geography publication. Many Australians are most concerned about just how their children and grandchildren will ever be able to afford to buy a house, even with both partners working in good jobs. They will be doomed to be perpetual renters of a box in the sky as the Great Australian Aspiration of owning a family home with a backyard fades for ever from their dreams. The subject of this New Geography article is on how state government high-density policies cause this excessive housing cost.